Share this

Read more!

Get our weekly email

Enter your email address

Pablo Iglesias, Ska Keller, Pierre Laurent, Alexis Tsipras and Gregor Gysi (From left to right) wave to the crowd from the stage at the election rally in Athens. Demotix/Michael Debets. All rights reserved.

As we gear
up for another election Sunday in Greece, nobody seems willing to discuss the day after. The latest polls confirm that the majority of the Greek voters are
benumbed by recent developments. In contrast to the highly political
confrontation of January, elections this time seem to miss their most essential
element; engagement. And, if anything, that's bad news for democracy in Greece.

The poll
findings indicate a fragmented electorate, a majority of swing vote, especially
from the left, and no clear lead for any of the two major contenders (Syriza
and New Democracy).

Undoubtedly,
Alexis Tsipras' popularity has suffered following the adoption of the new
three-year bailout program. Eventually, after successive months of bruising
negotiations, the Ex-Premier has been accepted as a credible partner among the
country's lenders, and he is still leading the polls for the most eligible
candidate, yet the way a one-eyed man leads the
blind.

Since the very
first days of Tsipras' administration, many of its opponents inside and outside
the country promoted the 'left parenthesis' scenario, a conviction that the
first left government in Greece would collapse soon after people realized that
there was no alternative to the German-led austerity. Of course, that notion
did not reach the vast majority of Tsipras' supporters plus those who did not
vote for him but relied somehow on his major promise to clear up the old regime
- of PASOK and New Democracy - that ruled continuously for almost four decades.

All these
critical voices took for granted that 'Alexis' would bring a better agreement
than those signed by his predecessors, which in turn would blow the balance of
power for the benefit of the subdued masses of underemployed, unemployed and
impoverished ex-middle class citizens - call it the precariat.

A young,
charismatic, 'sinless' leader became the game changer of an entire political
system - till the moment he put his own signature on another austerity program,
the third rescue deal in five years, or as it is widely called the 'left
memorandum'.

Greek
politics have risen from obscurity as long as its battered economy has become
the headline of almost every report from Europe. For the past five years, the
word 'collapse' was synonymous with economic and political woes in Athens. If
there is something to collapse nowadays, it is neither Alexis Tsipras nor his
wounded party, but the public's belief in recovery. And when there is no such
confidence, it is highly unlikely for people to be motivated and assume
ownership of the reforms, a persistent theme in the institutions' manuals.

Lack of confidence
has been a persistent trend in Greek politics until last January. Long before
that time, few believed there was any chance the bailout programs would work.
For the majority, the despicable memorandum that accelerated economic
contraction was also inapplicable. (Many argued that this was exactly the
program's initial goal and success, to deprive Greece of its sovereignty in
order to make it easier for the European lenders to secure the price of any
rescue through an asset-stripping scheme). The outcome proved them right.

Syriza's
response, through its previous election program (announced in Thessaloniki a
year ago), was nothing more than a mild version of the 1990s social democratic
experience. But even that program was not
accepted by Greece's partners who seemed determined not to allow any departure
from the fiscal consolidation project of post-crisis Europe. For the weakest
Eurozone economies the message was clear: political accountability is limited
to the “moral hazard' narrative or how to persuade the precariat that the risk
taken by the government to secure, for instance, full employment is a burden to
the financial stability brought to you by Schauble & Co.

Tsipras'
retreat from his Thessaloniki promises means that Greeks are now left with only
one option, which is definitely not the left one he was voted for: abidance by
the same draconian rules, a single entity of reforms wherein parties just claim
different configurations; a TINA of the twenty-first century.

So, if this
is politics, voters of the left just do not care anymore. The inclusive
participation of the younger and most educated in January's elections
–especially in constituencies where Syriza's victory was uncontested– most probably will configure a highly
increased voting abstention next Sunday. Lack of confidence has returned, but
this time it leaves no space for engagement.

This is
happening because the so called 'agreekment' of July 12 has shown the limits of
the entire political system in a nearly bankrupt country with no control of its
banking system. The major lesson to be taught is that no matter how you have
managed to present a primary surplus and your economy exceeds the average
Eurozone growth (a 'success story' of internal devaluation which restores competiveness as far as the privileged
interlocutors of the old regime are concerned, the black hole of an insolvent banking
system still chokes off real economy activity).

Since 2009,
Greek people voted seven times in national, local and European parliament
elections plus in a referendum, which makes it eight if we take into account
the forthcoming elections for yet another legislature charged with a Memorandum
of Understanding. To their understanding, there is no protest vote against the
bankers.

Despite the
vast renewal of politicians and admistrators, the bankers are untouched. The
same old people have been running the banks before and after their collapse;
during the crisis financing is channeled into the same businesses, notably
those identified with the reckless past (and still find opportunities
regardless of who is in charge at the Maximos Mansion, the offices of the Head
of the Government).

Deadlocks always
come with a tricky dilemma. Such a dilemma regarding the first
two Greek programs was that had it not accepted the troika's conditions, the
government would not be able to guarantee salaries and pensions. Replace
salaries and pensions with bank deposits and you have the same argument
regarding the third program.

In an
unprecedented demonstration of defiance, the Greek voters rejected the Juncker
proposal just to get it harsher back on the table. Admittedly though, Greeks
seemed to withstand the impact of capital controls imposed a week before the
referendum; no major unrest, no sway by an equally unprecedented campaign for
“Yes”, orchestrated hand in hand by the institutions, the media monopolies and
their political patrons.

However,
one could validly argue that there have been two kind of Greek votes this year;
while the referendum culminated the January mandate
to end austerity – a quasi-revolt against the Eurosystem, capital flight
between December 2014 and April 2015 had reached 29.4 billion euros.
Non-financial enterprises withdrew 7.2 billions (a 35% decrease of deposits
since November 2014) and households 22.3 billion (16% respectively).

The outflow
of deposits “has largely taken the form of cash withdrawals and hoarding, while
flight of capital has also been recorded”, Bank of Greece said in a June
report, mentioning that withdrawals by households have been related to time
deposits (“a sample of uncertainty”) and “outflows are distributed to all
depositors' thresholds” as “percentage changes are larger for depositors with
relatively small amounts of deposits”, meaning that minor depositors also took
a hit from uncertainty.

The story
of the “first government of the Left” ended when everyone realized that the
precariat's vote of confidence weighed less than the vote in the form of
deposits by those who still have their money aside, even if many among them
were to join the “No” vote, too.

This does
not necessarily confirm the left parenthesis scenario. While people's support
to the European institutions hits historic lows, anti-euro opposition has not
yet convinced them that their deposits will be safe in an event of monetary
transition. Even those who feel betrayed by Syriza and have nothing to lose
declare their reluctance to enter the voting booth.

On the
other hand, pro-euro opposition has not restored its legitimacy among active
voters and its embarrassed campaign only corrals disillusioned right-wingers
but not politically homeless centrists who cringe at Syriza's transformation
into a pro-euro agent. Tsipras and his party most probably will get another
ticket on the promise that they will implement all these countervailing
measures to soften austerity. However, their highest playing card is made out
of fear that Syriza's defeat will restore the old regime.

Choosing
between two evils is not exactly a political argument, let alone a left one.
And implementation of countervailing measures is not exactly a discussion on
what's next, how the economy will replenish its human resources and the country
will achieve economic independence. Creditors also seem smart (or treacherous)
enough to exclude a bail-in (for the time being) opting for a large-scale bank
recapitalization. Keeping a Trojan horse full of bankers inside the walls of a
besieged economy makes sure that there will always be a reason for not raising
the banners of war again. Voters are forced to bail-in a system that has been
never “too-big-to-fail”.

The
ex-troika now called “institutions” (always been eurocracy, under the aegis of
international capital) promises the Greek people will not suffer this time. And
here we are; institutions are not accountable; their mandate, even failed, is
no revocable; no resentful voter can really dispense with their services;
terminating the relationship unleashes their fury; Citizens see no future in a
political system where voting will always be a
tricky dilemma. A bail-in vote will neither recapitalize Greek politics nor
will break the connection between sovereign and bank risks, between the political
and the financial elites. Not the next day; not any other day.

If you enjoyed this article then please consider liking Can Europe Make it? on Facebook and following us on Twitter @oD_Europe

Comments

Related

This article is published under a Creative Commons
Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence. If you have any
queries about republishing please
contact us.
Please check individual images for licensing details.